3
Develop and implement a State-based system of differentiated recognition, accountability, and support School-based accountability system built on multiple measures Priority, Focus, Monitor, Progressing, Meeting, and Reward schools System of supports Set ambitious but achievable annual measurable objectives 6 year trajectory Cuts the percentage of students who are not proficient in reading or math in half by Individualized for school, subject, subgroup Principle 2: State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support Rachelle Tome3

7
Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) Targets* The annual measurable objectives (AMOs) for Pineville Middle School will be determined by dividing into 6 equal increments the percentage number needed to reach the proficiency target over 6 years. An AMO will be determined for each school, each tested subject and each student sub-group. Reading or Math % Proficient ½ % Non- proficient AMO For each year % Proficient % Proficient Whole group Major Racial /Ethnic subgroups Economically Disadvantaged Students with Disabilities Limited English Proficient Super-subgroup Rachelle Tome7

8
Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) Targets* The annual measurable objectives (AMOs) for Pineville Middle School will be determined by dividing into 6 equal increments the percentage number needed to reach the proficiency target over 6 years. An AMO will be determined for each school, each tested subject and each student sub-group. Reading or Math % Proficient ½ % Non- proficient AMO For each year % Proficient % Proficient Whole group Major Racial /Ethnic subgroups Economically Disadvantaged Students with Disabilities Limited English Proficient Super-Subgroup Rachelle Tome8

13
School Accountability Index (SAI) Calculated and rank ordered. Schools with grades 3-8 and high school will have two indexes.

14
Monitor Schools identification Rachelle Tome14 CategoryExpectation Participation95%No-Monitor Whole GroupTargets met or progressing- reading or math No-monitor SSGTargets met or progressing-reading or math No-monitor WSAGRanked above 25%- reading and mathNo-Monitor SAIRanked above 15%No-Monitor OAIADA or grad rate metNo-Monitor Each Title 1 school meeting any of the following will be categorized as a Monitor school (unless it is a Priority or Focus school)

15
Monitor Schools identification Additional considerations: A school with a testing enrollment of fewer than 20 in the whole school (small school) that would have qualified for Priority school status based on the School achievement and progress analysis (3 year avg. and progress) in the first year of the accountability system- If the school’s data continues to be below the threshold used for identifying Priority schools in year 1, the school will be reclassified as a Priority school. Schools identified as Monitor for 3 consecutive years will be reviewed and added to either the Priority group for low achievement and progress in the whole school, or the Focus group for low performing subgroups. Rachelle Tome15

17
Funding: Targeted Title I accountability funds (Consolidated application) Districts may set aside up to 20% of district allocation to support improvement activities. ESEA reallocated improvement funds-. If available, based on individual school needs Supports for Monitor schools Rachelle Tome17

19
Supports for Monitor schools ESEA Accountability Set-Aside Project Sheet EXAMPLE Project Description: To describe school improvement activities for Pineville School - identified as a monitor school during the school year. Rachelle Tome19

20
Supports for Monitor schools ESEA Accountability Set-Aside Project Sheet Project A: Required for ESEA Monitor schools (optional funding amount up to 20% of the district's Title IA allocation.) Response should briefly outline how the school will implement the following three “Response to Intervention” indicators:  The school will use an identification process (including ongoing conversations with instructional leadership teams and data points to be used) for all students at risk of failing or in need of targeted interventions.  The school uses a tiered, differentiated intervention process to assign research-based interventions aligned with the individual needs of identified students (the process includes a description of how interventions are selected and assigned to students as well as the frequency and duration of interventions for Tier 2 and Tier 3 students).  The school uses a monitoring process (including a multidisciplinary that meets regularly to review student intervention outcome data and identifies “triggers” and next steps for unsuccessful interventions) for targeted intervention students to ensure fidelity and effectiveness. Response should outline the specific activities and strategies that will occur as part of the school’s improvement plan during Rachelle Tome20

22
Supports for Monitor schools ESEA Accountability Set-Aside Project Sheet EXAMPLE Outcome/Performance Indicators: Describe how you will know that the project is successful. By June 2015, grade-level teams will meet weekly to discuss student data and create individualized action plans for struggling students. By June 2015, the leadership team will meet monthly to identify trends in the data and plan at least three professional development seminars for teachers. By June 2015, 100% of the teachers will attend workshops on interventions for struggling students – in the areas of literacy or mathematics. Rachelle Tome22